Why did Kirby's mid-70's and on work just not look as good?

[jools&jim]

 

I don't care about composition and am totally turned off by the aesthetics of his drawings in general. Not joking. Totally serious.

What's to apologize for? Not appreciating an artist's work, a certain period from the complete body of work, or a certain general style ain't a crime.

 

I'm not a fan of Picasso's "African Period" -- but I certainly don't think that it lacks merit just because it doesn't appeal to me.

 

As for this...

 

I look at Kamandi or New Gods and say, "how can anyone collect this *spoon*"?

"What I Collect is Awesome..."

 

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

I'm just not a fan of his blocky animation during this period. Everyone looks like a Rock 'em Sockem robot.

[40sJohn]

I don't care about composition and am totally turned off by the aesthetics of his drawings in general. Not joking. Totally serious.

What's to apologize for? Not appreciating an artist's work, a certain period from the complete body of work, or a certain general style ain't a crime.

 

I'm not a fan of Picasso's "African Period" -- but I certainly don't think that it lacks merit just because it doesn't appeal to me.

 

As for this...

 

I look at Kamandi or New Gods and say, "how can anyone collect this *spoon*"?

"What I Collect is Awesome..."

 

 

 

Your posts in this thread have been valuable in helping me see the Kirby fan perspective. Critical opinions are not always well received on this board, so I like to establish that I am not trolling and want to add another serious perspective.

[jools&jim]

 

Your posts in this thread have been valuable in helping me see the Kirby fan perspective. Critical opinions are not always well received on this board, so I like to establish that I am not trolling and want to add another serious perspective.

 

 

[jools&jim]

 

I know we're talking primarily about the aesthetics of Kirby's '70s art style here: a blockier, more abstract, "short-hand" approach to figure work; an increased fondness for cosmic tableaux and super-machines/"Kirbytech"; a more pronounced Meso-American/Mayan-Aztec-Incan flavor to costume/character design; and, in general, a bigger & bolder "attack" to the storytelling, with plot and action taking a backseat to extended character development.

 

What should also be added (or maybe it goes without saying), and the relative quality of his art notwithstanding, is that--conceptually speaking--Kirby was in TOP form, producing characters, settings, and even complete mythologies during this period which both DC and Marvel have been stealing from...er, I mean "exploring" ever since.

 

Just the short list of Kirby's heavy hitters from the '70s speaks for itself: Apokolips, New Genesis, Darkseid, Orion, Mister Miracle, The Forever People, Metron, Etrigan, Kamandi, the Celestials, Eternals & Deviants, etc. -- many of which (esp. the Fourth World stuff) have proven to be very nearly as fertile conceptually as his explosion of imagination and creativity during the 1960s which gave us much of the Marvel Universe.

 

Even better, unlike his justifiably lauded '60s work for Marvel, there is no dispute whatsoever, no gray areas at all, regarding who created or contributed what: it was all PURE Kirby.

 

 

 

 

 

[Comicdey]

Back in the 70's I didn't know about the GA Kirby other than as a bit of history as I'd never owned any. I always though both he and Ditko were fun to read in their early marvel and somewhat difficult in their later 70's and 80's work.

 

I have since come around and do enjoy them and have always been a kamandi fan.

 

The blocky captain America's in the 200's for Kirby were something I avoided. I still remember the Ditko DD 162 in the middle of Millers run and other filler issues of titles. Ugh

 

But in total and even now, I agree that those artists spoke and had a vision in their later years that I matured to enjoy again.

 

Doesn't mean I'd pay top dollar for a high grade but having the issues is a good idea.

[the blob]

Sorry gang, I hate to do this in a thread that has turned into a love fest for Kirby, but count me as a Jack Kirby hater. I am with the OP in that I think his work turned to in the '70s.

 

I like his golden age work, but his Bronze Age stuff is horrible. I don't care about composition and am totally turned off by the aesthetics of his drawings in general. Not joking. Totally serious.

 

It's hard for me to describe what I don't like. It may be the fingers that look like 2 x 4's lumber or the round faces with block teeth. Whatever it is, it doesn't work for me. I look at Kamandi or New Gods and say, "how can anyone collect this "? The good thing about this thread is that it is giving me an explanation to that question.

 

Carry on.

 

 

BLASHPHEMY!!!!

 

Of course, I felt the same way for a long while, but I guess I learned to appreciate the wacky abstractiness of a lot of it. Just like I enjoy olives now when, for decades, I did not, and I enjoy wine now when once it's only purpose for me was to get me drunk. I still don't like whiskey though, much to the dismay of my wife. It isn't all a winner and the late 70s marvel stuff sometimes leaves something to be desired.

[Unca Ben]

I thought his '70s DC art was pretty good, his '70s Marvel art was good on some stuff, but Cap was awkward. His plots were mostly fantastic (except for Forever People - I couldn't grok that) but his dialogue was clunky; just downright terrible in spots.

 

Jack is still The King. His silver age work is often imitated, never duplicated.

[fmaz]

As others have said, I don't think you can paint everything in the era with such a broad brush... no pun intended.

 

Personally, I didn't (and still don't) enjoy his return to Captain America in the 70's and felt that was not his best work (with the exception being the Bicentennial Treasury issue) but otherwise I thought he was still doing some really great work during that time.

[shadroch]

But around the time he went to DC, it just went downhill.

 

I know...just horribly ugly, with no imagination at all...

 

 

 

 

 

Does Flying Guy have two right hands?

[jools&jim]

 

Does Flying Guy have two right hands?

Picky, picky...

 

Anyway. Which "flying guy"? I count at least two.

 

If you mean Lightray, then no, I don't think so -- his trajectory is carrying him upward and slightly to the left in the panel, so his torso is twisted slightly up and to his right, which places his left thumb and most of his left arm, which is trailing and foreshortened, slightly behind his body and partially in shadow, as indicated by the black inks...

 

 

 

[grebal]

Funny coincidence, I came across this description of Kirby at some website that ranked Kirby #1 (listed top 100 american comic book artist greats, a list that someone omitted Starlin, McFarlane and (Marie) Severin among others).

 

With all due respect to the gentlemen listed below, the gap between Jack Kirby and the rest of the field might just as well be an ocean. Jack's accomplishments are legion. Not only a great artist and cartoonist, but a breathtaking visual stylist who created a large portion of the storytelling language every comic artist uses today. He is the unquestioned king of invention; not just characters, but devices, stories, races, worlds, genres, and even companies flowed from his fingers. For over 50 years his exuberance, his vitality, and his sheer will helped him carry an industry on his shoulders. Very few people in any creative field are acknowledged as the obvious and unchallenged master of their domain. Kirby is one of them.

 

SEE: Fantastic Four #55-58; Thor #154-157; "Sky Masters" newspaper strip; Fighting American (Hardcover reprint); Oh, what the hell, just anything before 1973!

bold mine.

 

http://www.acomics.com/best10.htm

 

 

[Mr. 10%]

Funny coincidence, I came across this description of Kirby at some website that ranked Kirby #1 (listed top 100 american comic book artist greats, a list that someone omitted Starlin, McFarlane and (Marie) Severin among others).

 

With all due respect to the gentlemen listed below, the gap between Jack Kirby and the rest of the field might just as well be an ocean. Jack's accomplishments are legion. Not only a great artist and cartoonist, but a breathtaking visual stylist who created a large portion of the storytelling language every comic artist uses today. He is the unquestioned king of invention; not just characters, but devices, stories, races, worlds, genres, and even companies flowed from his fingers. For over 50 years his exuberance, his vitality, and his sheer will helped him carry an industry on his shoulders. Very few people in any creative field are acknowledged as the obvious and unchallenged master of their domain. Kirby is one of them.

 

SEE: Fantastic Four #55-58; Thor #154-157; "Sky Masters" newspaper strip; Fighting American (Hardcover reprint); Oh, what the hell, just anything before 1973!

bold mine.

 

http://www.acomics.com/best10.htm

 

 

Yup - Jacks da king

[That Ron Dude]

Kirby is my favourite artist, not just in comics but through all of history. In addition to being my favourite I think he is the best in the history of comics and probably by a fair bit. HOWEVER, I want to mention a few others that I could see as a challenge to him.

 

Shuster-- Co-created then anchored Superman which begat an industry.

Ditko- Co-created Spider-man which outsold Kirby's books and remains enormously popular now, sixty years later.

Wood-- Greatest technician in the history of comics. Created vocabulary for the SF comic. Had SF comics taken off the way superheros did, we would all be talking about Wood.

Foster, Raymond, Hogarth-- Created the storytelling vocabulary for the comic strip. Brilliant technicians. Captured the imagination of America.

 

That's all I've got for you. There are many others I love but none others that I think could challenge Kirby for supremacy in any context.